ILNews

State bar approves pro bono reporting requirement

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

How many hours of pro bono work did you perform last year?

That’s a question lawyers likely will have to answer soon, but not without some debate over another question: What constitutes pro bono work, exactly?

The Indiana State Bar Association’s House of Delegates last week approved a proposal championed by Indiana Chief Justice Brent Dickson that for the first time would mandate attorneys report the number of hours of free legal service they provide annually.

cj2-15col.jpg Members of the Indianapolis Bar Association watch a video featuring Chief Justice Brent Dickson, who addressed the gathering Oct. 10 to push a proposal for pro bono reporting. (Photo courtesy IndyBar)

Outgoing ISBA President Dan Vinovich said the resolution passed with a couple of provisos – that there be further study on what constitutes pro bono work and an assurance that the proposal won’t be a step toward mandating attorneys provide pro bono work.

“My understanding is eight states, I believe, do currently have this, and it seems to be increasing in trend,” Vinovich said. “The concept is a noble vision.”

Several proponents of pro bono reporting point to Florida as an example. Pro bono reporting has been required there for more than two decades, and the result has been a steady increase in service hours reported and dollars contributed to legal aid groups, both of which are tracked by the Florida bar.

Twenty years ago, lawyers in the Sunshine State donated 806,874 hours of pro bono work and $1.5 million to legal aid groups. For the year ending June 30, 2012, those hours had more than doubled and lawyers’ legal aid contributions more than tripled to almost $4.9 million.

“It turns out there is an uptick in volunteerism when mandatory reporting is put into place, but it is not a magic wand that will solve problems,” said Indiana Tax Court Judge Martha Blood Wentworth, who also chairs the Indiana Pro Bono Commission.

Dickson stumped for the reporting proposal in an address to the Indianapolis Bar Association earlier this month. He told Indiana Lawyer that the Supreme Court is looking for suggestions from lawyers on how to encourage more pro bono work and how to implement the reporting requirement.

“We’re really looking for not just lawyers to do pro bono work, but how do you incentivize it,” Dickson said. States such as Arizona, for example, provide continuing legal education allowances in exchange for hours of pro bono service, and some have suggested other potential rewards for pro bono work.

Marion Superior Judge Mark Stoner, who chairs IndyBar’s Pro Bono Standing Committee, likes the idea of defraying CLE costs for pro bono work. “Given the prolonged tough economy, particularly for solo practitioners, I believe this would give them sufficient incentive to perform pro bono work. Everyone would benefit: Lawyers would receive additional training, lawyers’ costs would be reduced, and citizens would receive more and more varied pro bono services.”

But many attorneys don’t need an incentive. They say the work holds its own rewards.

Case studies

A couple of weekends ago, 67 refugees from seven nations took a step toward securing their futures with the help of 15 attorneys who volunteered part of a Saturday to help walk them through the immigration maze.

Sponsoring agency Neighborhood Christian Legal Clinic in Indianapolis said this month’s Refugee Green Card Day event was the first in which lawyers were joined by doctors and photographers. This “one-stop shop” allowed refugees from countries such as Burma and Sudan to get all the help they needed to prepare and file documents to adjust their immigration status.

“Every time we’ve gotten really positive feedback from attorneys,” said Rachel Van Tyle, staff attorney for the legal clinic. “It’s happy work. You’re helping someone become a legal permanent resident of the United States. That’s one of the reasons this event is so successful with volunteer attorneys.”

The Green Card Day events take place twice a year, in February and October, months that tend to coincide with federal refugee settlement patterns, Van Tyle said.

Attorneys who help out in such events come from many walks of life and types of law practice.

Events like this are ideal for pro bono work because the commitment is defined and discernable, Van Tyle said. The clinic keeps track of the hours attorneys volunteer and reports those numbers to the Pro Bono Commission. She thinks mandatory reporting is “a great idea,” particularly because many law schools are placing greater emphasis on service and volunteer work.

While Indiana has no requirement, the commission sets an aspirational goal for lawyers to perform 50 hours of pro bono work annually.

Cohen & Malad LLP attorney Ned Mulligan is a member of the IndyBar Pro Bono Standing Committee and co-chairs the bar’s Ask-a-Lawyer program, which earlier this month dispatched attorneys to 11 Indianapolis Public Library branches, offering free legal advice to more than 600 people. Common needs are in the areas criminal law, family law, bankruptcy and landlord-tenant disputes.

Mulligan said the need for legal representation far outstrips the ability to meet it. “It’s apparent to me there are a lot of people who have legal problems and some of them have serious legal problems, and they don’t know where to go and they don’t know who to see.”

Question time

Requiring pro bono reporting is a good step, Mulligan said, but it’s important that lawyers who do volunteer work are those who want to. And, he said, it’s important to determine what kind of work will be counted as pro bono. For instance, is serving on a pro bono committee the same as representing a client in a matter?

Dickson said there are plenty of such questions, and the court will welcome the bar’s help in sorting out the answers. He posed a hypothetical: If an attorney does legal work for his church or the Red Cross, is it pro bono?

“I don’t know how I come out on it,” he said.

What about cases that start out with paying clients, but at some point the client can no longer afford to pay? If the attorney agrees to continue her representation without charge, the rules say that’s not a pro bono case, Dickson said. Whether that distinction should continue if reporting is required is another consideration, he added.

Another unresolved question: Should each attorney’s reported pro bono hours be publicly disclosed on the Roll of Attorneys?

There is at least one area where Wentworth said there is no question. She’s repeatedly heard worries that the reporting requirement would be a step toward requiring attorneys provide pro bono service.

“One of the reasons people are against mandatory reporting is they feel like it’s a slippery slope” toward a service requirement, she said. “I don’t know how many ways we have to say that’s not the case.”

The bar doesn’t want mandatory pro bono, and neither does the Pro Bono Commission, Wentworth said. Indiana caselaw doesn’t favor mandatory pro bono, she said, noting a 2001 Indiana Supreme Court ruling in David T. Sholes v. Christine (Sholes) Patterson, holding, among other things, that appointed counsel in civil cases must be compensated.

Vinovich noted that in the couple of states where a mandatory pro bono scheme was enacted, it was later ruled unconstitutional. He doubted such a proposal would survive an Article 1, Section 23 challenge under the Indiana Constitution, and besides, “No one has indicated Indiana would be going this direction if we take this step.”

Wentworth said what’s in mind instead is nothing short of a change in culture in the profession to favor more volunteerism.

“We knew we could not make a cultural change without the state bar and the local bars as well,” she said. “There’s no question this will be talked about, and there will be a wide array of people asked to weigh in on it.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Stand up in church too
    This reporting requirement is the wrong thing to do for so many reasons. I am very disappointed to see the Delegates approved it. How would you feel about standing up in church and announcing your contribution to the plate? Would that encourage you to put more in? Think very carefully about what we are about to lose here, you will not get it back.
  • unintended consequences if pro bono work must be recorded
    There's one effect of this new policy that may not have been considered. As a solo appellate practitioner, I don't keep track of my pro bono hours. Not having to start and stop the meter is one of the nice fringe benefits of doing such work. Now I'm faced with losing that benefit, or else taking the risk of estimating my time.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT